sdb815 Posted June 21, 2004 Share Posted June 21, 2004 WASHINGTON (CBS.MW) -- People unhappy about being denied health-care coverage by their health maintenance organizations cannot sue HMOs over these decisions, the Supreme Court ruled Monday. http://www.investors.com/breakingnews.asp?...=21739601&brk=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duitf2 Posted June 21, 2004 Share Posted June 21, 2004 Yea score one for the insurance companies on this one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nowimnothing Posted June 21, 2004 Share Posted June 21, 2004 This decision sounds alot more evil than it really is. The court seems to have just said that, under the current laws (which is what they are there to interpret), "the state complaints are pre-empted by the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act..." They're just saying that by current law there is a different avenue to sort these cases out (ERISA). If people have complaints, they need to go to congress, because its there that the laws need to be passed to give some sort of patient protection, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Veteran Posted June 21, 2004 Veteran Share Posted June 21, 2004 i'm not so sure how i feel about this one. i'm a member of an HMO, my wife has numerous health problems, yet we've never been denied coverage thus far. even out of network. but...one of the main reasons health care costs are so astronomical is the litigious society we've become. we sue at the drop of a hat for the most assinine reasons. and eventually we all end up paying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoyablue Posted June 21, 2004 Share Posted June 21, 2004 i'm not so sure how i feel about this one. i'm a member of an HMO, my wife has numerous health problems, yet we've never been denied coverage thus far. even out of network. but...one of the main reasons health care costs are so astronomical is the litigious society we've become. we sue at the drop of a hat for the most assinine reasons. and eventually we all end up paying. There has been repeated cases of where HMOs denied treatment to patients who are lawyers or patients related to one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Veteran Posted June 21, 2004 Veteran Share Posted June 21, 2004 i'm not so sure how i feel about this one. i'm a member of an HMO, my wife has numerous health problems, yet we've never been denied coverage thus far. even out of network. but...one of the main reasons health care costs are so astronomical is the litigious society we've become. we sue at the drop of a hat for the most assinine reasons. and eventually we all end up paying. The reason health care cost went up so sharply is not due to individual people suits, it is because the insurance companies took a bath in the stock market after The Bubble Burst. Gotta recoup the loss somehow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spyntek Posted June 21, 2004 Share Posted June 21, 2004 ALl of you people who have HMO's for insurance, your chance of seeking legal action and winning is almost next to impossible. In a 9-0 decision, you may no longer bring an HMO to state court, but now must be tried in federal court. Legal experts say that plantiffs will find that it is very very difficult to win in federal court and if you do happen to win, the payout for damges is very low. A win for HMO's and insurance companies. Again, Republican's looking out for insurance companie, (another lobby group that has the Bush administration in their back pocket and now aparently, the Supreme Court) A sad day indeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b3ta Posted June 21, 2004 Share Posted June 21, 2004 Interesting but I'm not clear on the topic. Is there a source to this discussion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemo Posted June 21, 2004 Share Posted June 21, 2004 https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=180870 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spyntek Posted June 21, 2004 Share Posted June 21, 2004 ,Jun 21 2004, 17:46] Interesting but I'm not clear on the topic. Is there a source to this discussion? You can get your info from CNN Here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemo Posted June 21, 2004 Share Posted June 21, 2004 or you could just look at the other thread that has been posted about this already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caustiK Posted June 21, 2004 Share Posted June 21, 2004 wow, 9-0 and you blame it on bush. haven't had a chance to look at it yet, but come on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spyntek Posted June 21, 2004 Share Posted June 21, 2004 This decision sounds alot more evil than it really is.The court seems to have just said that, under the current laws (which is what they are there to interpret), "the state complaints are pre-empted by the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act..." They're just saying that by current law there is a different avenue to sort these cases out (ERISA). If people have complaints, they need to go to congress, because its there that the laws need to be passed to give some sort of patient protection, etc. The problem with that is, as most legal experts will tell you, it is much more difficult to win (i.e. planitffs against insurance companies) against HMO's and insurance companies and if by some chance you do win, the punitive and awarded damages are a lot less, meaning you might not even be able to pay your hospital bill. This is a big win for insurance companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spyntek Posted June 21, 2004 Share Posted June 21, 2004 wow, 9-0 and you blame it on bush. haven't had a chance to look at it yet, but come on. Well, clearly someone from the insurance industry "talked" with a few of the would be dissenters on the high court. Hell, Scalia went on a fishing trip with Cheney for crying out loud. So much for an impartial High Court Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Veteran Posted June 22, 2004 Veteran Share Posted June 22, 2004 https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=180870 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kennyout Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 the article is no longer availble....i cannot fully comprehend what to say....nor what to base on otherwize: adonai I hope things work out for you and your wife bud I hate to see them suddenlly drop care/whatnot for her/others because now they don't have to worry about lawsuits...if insurance companys would actually stop denieing coverage/treatments for things, then we would not have to worry bout excedinglly high cost(let alone stockmarket stuff), let alone get turned around and sued at every chance that they do denie someone/fail at something... let alone given the chance HMOs will not do treatment if its too expensive for them/something/situtations... take for example that CSI episode where that woman is dying and she rams her car and kills three HMO people... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Veteran Posted June 22, 2004 Veteran Share Posted June 22, 2004 the article is no longer availble....i cannot fully comprehend what to say....nor what to base onotherwize: adonai I hope things work out for you and your wife bud I hate to see them suddenlly drop care/whatnot for her/others because now they don't have to worry about lawsuits...if insurance companys would actually stop denieing coverage/treatments for things, then we would not have to worry bout excedinglly high cost(let alone stockmarket stuff), let alone get turned around and sued at every chance that they do denie someone/fail at something... let alone given the chance HMOs will not do treatment if its too expensive for them/something/situtations... take for example that CSI episode where that woman is dying and she rams her car and kills three HMO people... thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kennyout Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 ^lol adonai fits this thread nicelly Spyntek next time, post in the same thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearded Kirklander Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 All they have to do is change the federal law. That will fix the problem entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spyntek Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 i'm not so sure how i feel about this one. i'm a member of an HMO, my wife has numerous health problems, yet we've never been denied coverage thus far. even out of network. but...one of the main reasons health care costs are so astronomical is the litigious society we've become. we sue at the drop of a hat for the most assinine reasons. and eventually we all end up paying. I am, sorry about your wife, but you also need to look at the insurance costs for docors, plus the ever increasong costs for prescriotion drugs and hospital supplies. I am sory to say that if doctors screw up, they need to he held accountable, puntive damages must be awarded, and hopsital costs must be paid plus, if warranted, loss of work or the inability to work must be compensated. You can't deny that fact. This decision will only make HMO's less repsponsible for they know that they will always win in court Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.... Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 ALl of you people who have HMO's for insurance, your chance of seeking legal action and winning is almost next to impossible. In a 9-0 decision, you may no longer bring an HMO to state court, but now must be tried in federal court. Legal experts say that plantiffs will find that it is very very difficult to win in federal court and if you do happen to win, the payout for damges is very low. A win for HMO's and insurance companies. Again, Republican's looking out for insurance companie, (another lobby group that has the Bush administration in their back pocket and now aparently, the Supreme Court) A sad day indeed Good. Yeah...Bush has the supreme court in his back pocket...then praytell ....why did all 9 vote this way? Certainly he has 4 staunch enemies on there....Hmmm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.... Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 Merged Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kennyout Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 ewww the threads did not merge nicelly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Veteran Posted June 22, 2004 Veteran Share Posted June 22, 2004 I am, sorry about your wife, but you also need to look at the insurance costs for docors, plus the ever increasong costs for prescriotion drugs and hospital supplies. I am sory to say that if doctors screw up, they need to he held accountable, puntive damages must be awarded, and hopsital costs must be paid plus, if warranted, loss of work or the inability to work must be compensated. You can't deny that fact. This decision will only make HMO's less repsponsible for they know that they will always win in court I agree they need to be held accountable. But I don't think suing the pants off them is the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdb815 Posted June 22, 2004 Author Share Posted June 22, 2004 As someone already stated, you can still sue in federal court. The federal law needs to be changed so that people can sue for a larger sum of money or perhaps jail time for the people that make those bad decisions at HMOs. We all know how long that will take seeing as the HMOs will fight any new legislation tooth and nail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts